




y tP 


Va •; * yp 9 \ ° ™ 

o n c ^ * y * * s ' * v 1 » * 'T* 

* 0 -^ % °o G° ^ 

S& - ^ v ° 


AT </> 

*Y L 


" *'o> y* A , ^ * 

’<p A X c 0 N fj * 


<>* V 

OQ x 


A ^ 

vr r' 


\ * 0 



'j/S* ^ 

cc ^ 

\ 

°-/- * » 1 

>'* \ 

■ C* 

V 

^ *P 



w * 


•v 



* vv: ’ll ' ’ ”'»:;* 77 ‘ 1 * A 

v^ o ^ ^ Ljp G ^jJPI^vL- \~ X x> '■ 

C* *- ' ' L o^ ~ L </ . * p.0 Q_ L- 

°»°\<f ,T>°, \ '•"' "‘J>\'-r% * 

aV +- <2 ^ * *<> -7 ^ /W r- 5? * «'£> 

A ^ - T<* v. * r»p|, « <A * 4\WA. ° ^ 

<* $ ^ </> <^v ^,, ^ *> ^ XXV2 -^ X/ 

^ ^ > f O *3 ^ O • f ^> ^ ^ 

^ V3 C* A 

iG <* y o * \ * 

A V A"* ^ 

■ 0 * *£%£* L 4 s 

- '"o 4 .' £&&<* - ++ Y 1 

£°<. 

<*• 

C* ^ 

O. Ar 



\^‘ Lp. ' TH.^Tf- 

s ^ sSS/jS^A 

V ’ -. ’ L* 1 * * s ' <^ I , 

tf c 0 N c ^ o 0 r o- ^ 

4 *. ' -^. , x y 

, o o x 





*> ^J 

r> 


o V 

0 M c ^ 



o 





9 I ' 4 V 
\ 


y O^ '~^ds ^ 

V ^ ' 



''> ■s > r , » ^ 0 \' ^ ^ 

1 .A ^' ,(4 <- 

./ •* rp- v.* L l**, "^ 








y* 

\ >1' r>^ y 

^ ^ ff i A ^ r/ > ^ f J ki 0 

^ * 0 * V s r //- ^ ^ 



, 0^ ^ " * 0 ^ C v 

^ ^ .. %• ' 


& y v, w . 

. V O ** J s .u 

^ **■ ,0^ V 



> V 

^ h * P\ S-, 

■*» c^ 

Cl ^ 

n i- , . „ °/. * • ! •> 

. ,L .y &' v . \ A 

aV 





<r>. 

,y <• 

* <51 C* -4 r> ✓ 

,S / i”"- *• '** s 

^ * V 0^ “ 

' v 

1^0 • 1 0o e , « 

<■ a C* i- o 

Lj o > _ * o.' 

kV r 





1 

A r V' v\> 41 

//h o xf> 0 Vv cj 

/- h <f> i\v ^ 

Vje^> ' ° ^ ^ ® 

’-5L ^ / * * -N s <* y 0 « X 

Nc ^°o cpLl'GL, L 

✓ 

✓ 

<x 


« oo x 

* A -n^ 

lV y 

/- < ^ V A,' ,0.* S' 

^ * ■ 1 " * V^ s ^ <■ > 0 H ■ 

*< " . ,/' ^ v ^ 

< _ ^\\w//2 y 

V f /> 



0^ 

'-X v K 
o or 

■\ ~f * 

vt • * y >^/\, ■ o; v ‘’C", v* 

. V ^twHHb^ * ^ *V f <3 5, ^ -<* 





\' X /y v \0 

G 0 4» O. Q v 

y O 1 G v x 

\ << ,r ' iv«s^ ✓ v* 

'4i-% y 

=v 1' <1 

H ^ 



< 



^ x> 

p v ^ 



* K >tt tL* * 

r- 

-. w . • ^ 

# ^ 0 * V v (Jy\ A ( o N c ^ / 1 4 6 ° . \ I » 



<f ' ' A ^ X C 0 * c 

1 • V V A * 

‘ A' ^ 

■fV v<> o 

y " ^ « 
x 0 o 

’Jo \ X-. ^ 

^-'’* 0^7 •.,%'•■ 1 

*>> _ /vf\ v > V /L ° AT' 

• '•' , \ -:; 'L o ’ 'J^ *\ N 



^ v A? c 
^ v = 

?^t: ,o o 




v , a> ^\V <fK % 

< "v;;-,; ^ A a c o/^- ^ ' s s -> a v 

%^ ,^.‘:;‘*l ** d ?y"'‘ 



\° L<. 


A v 
( -0‘ 

^ A Ji 

a?"”"'' ~ 

^ V = G ->b 0 \ „ 

- ^ ^ * 

■ u '>;- > CV 4 - 

* ,; X‘ , C- ^ jA /)l r <r‘r \\ ^ Y\^ > 

•S-. ^ _ i\\,9^/A » ^ ^ o / ■» 

" y -A "- |flt « A A » • 

, „ * y °,Sill§§P* y a- 

.o' .v " 11 * * Li." ° **■ "* L t ,n « V. l .'•' *« ^ y °* 1 ‘ n \ a „« c 

^ ^ ^ -e_ ,v'^ .• ^ 1J . , / i cP . f A c 

•>* V K 

o 0 X 





4 


aV <p 

kV ^ 


f 0 v 

3 '■^L A\ V AX\\\m y ^ ‘ ^ 

^ V* 

° x ° - A Xo ' 

^ L L .q c *,. ; '-m‘ : v oF r ^-, " 

L'i^'VL * ,N "/ . -• •,L '* 1 ’* vL^- # 


'S' <y V N 

o o » 

■ ;/ 41 4 < 7 *■ 

^ v ^ 






^ » 















































* 4T * 


V* 1 '.* * , •% A ,<■ °I. C */V A 

r. A. v* • 

\° 9* ^ , , , 

'l no’’ ^0- °0^. ' * ,,•,»' ^ .. 

A 0 l *A*°^ cv V o' > 0 > * 

'K* c- O iAAAAi r A- * “TVVfrV^ * “>*. A 

cO v ■- -}, o t/; p ^ys <j : i-x - < x ^ cO 

V7> 2 




^Lv v* ^ ™ 

I 8 4 0 * v A 0 N c A 7 * * S A' v < B 

L As A* A ^ % ?*> rO v A * 


O' ^ 


* 




^ o a>^. °WEW* A y Ar> 

^ * y© * <$/ A<- * \ A 

0 « c'%!' 1 '»'' 0° V H.. C *'“* O C^ 0 *'^ 

- c —*<• ^ oV'OO’ A 

'. 'oo' .''jmIIA ^ K ? 

* ,0o, 

® * ^ rf- 

oO O <- 


A * 




, '^ > i 1 

° ^ «* , 

*» A 'L ° 

*> 4? %<> V 1 

s \ Cl.' ” t> 

'Zr. ^ J «* %' jfi <V y 0 ♦ *> * A 

Ao c 

* A/u A 


^ <y ^ 
<.. o<y 


A 




a V 

° \° <L * 

<■ 0 O A 

o. > ( ,0' ,f , - v cs> * 5 N o ’ A o 

Ab v N \\L4> > ^ *9* "*o 

* A J t4\%$ A) ° <?'n S 

% 0 . $MMh Z * 4 


"■l* * 8 l A 


0 ^ 


4 


* ^ cfST0C\^ x - ~ ^ 

-< ^/ O -^^NsSS\l|y!% <s ,y V ^ 

" A ■ ? ,. -.T-- ,0 * *o 0 X 

v » ^ ^ ^ 0. 

y <y '»*’ fP C h ^ " ^ V Of r >- y 

5 N ° ' ^ y - o ^ ^ « " * > 

/ ^ V V s 

■o. A V iAw /In ^ <0 

z 


0- v - vl 8 



< y o » K* 
k A t 

^ -V ^ 



A o/v s s s .0^ 


l B 


-c v* V 1 



cK. y , 


*>■ * 


^ * 




<\ y o*A A 


x° Ar. >■ 

o ^ o i 4 

»nO \A 

* ^ V 
r* v<» v 4 4 

; '^A » 

. . * A ^ ^ , 

v A c 



^> K 






*» j 

•< ^ K 

<* 

° \ 0 * ~ 

> * 

A *'••/% *"’' v v o 44 " 

A" '\/ «C v 


* aV ^ r> ” 

A^ ' r >> ^ 

> ID < y o O x ^ A '^r. ^ / 

a l.* 0 ^ A- A ' r\ N C ♦ ^ 

v ^ , a^ C 4 * o. 

\ ^ -r 





■ex ft 



% 

ft r y 

* o N 0 ■ A 0 ’ ~*P 

A 0 V ° 0 ^ c> v' S’ . 

-It r iv^#/i.^ ^ ^ A 

^ A A , A, '% c At 

$ A; 



/ %. . 

O, - y s s .0 

rv K r ^ ft ft N ^ \ 

.‘OAo - o°’*'* 

■a. ^ 

^ AnSWI I *. ✓* . 

, o o' 

* < -r, * 

* A v ■*£-* * • l \ v>J - ^ 

\' Co ^ ^ ( a) 

m‘ \^ s * ♦ 7 A * o m 0 0 f L 
v oA >k A / ^ j0* ^ 

/\ * T~ 


r Ap 

R c0 ^ j * <\S' ° ( > '* M2MB2 + *y' 

•o^^ v, ,i % % t “ N s/\ r 0^ v A‘® 

■L^ - ^ A ^.‘ > wr 

A v : ^ 

^ f° a. >■ * a 

^| »» K o-» 0 ,. o '^fe"» , ,0\.., o/», 

-x a o r- <p ^ ^ <f» v * -v 

%. O * .A«»0 o V ,0 * 2&fe. * ^ 







<“ y 0 « X * A 

% ^ C° N 

.. % ^ 

'W 

a^, y ^ 

°7 ^Jl 1* 0 * 3 M O ' A V O, * » 

v\^ ! A > A o^ ^*A\ 



A. A 


\ >£» <•■■• /) 'W *n oJ> O. ^ 

S rv ^ ^ >. iv* ^ ^ 

. x o A <^ y ' JS ^ r “ nD CL ^ \ a» ^ ^ 

•■'* .A'-/", * 8 -'/o-.-% , "'* v v 

'. A .WO A .a ,; 



.CL 

































WOODROW 

WILSON 

ON 

Government in 
Relation to Business 


Address delivered at the Annual 
Banquet of THE ECONOMIC 
CLUB OF NEW YORK at the 
HOTEL ASTOR. 


MAY 23rd, 1912. 









ADDRESS BY GOV. WOODROW WILSON AT THE ANNUAL 
BANQUET OF THE ECONOMIC CLUB IN THE 
HOTEL ASTOR ON MAY 23, 1912. 

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen: 

I listened with a great deal of interest to the very gracious in¬ 
troduction that you have just heard, but with some scepticism upon 
one of the statements. Mr. Milburn said that everybody here knew 
> what I am, but that depends upon which newspaper he has read. 
Ld Most persons are so thoroughly uninformed as to my opinions that 
I have concluded that the only things they have not read are my 
speeches. 

But I want to say that it is with a great deal of pleasure that 
I find myself here to-night, turning out of the troubled paths of 
practical politics to come into a place where you have the purpose 
and the appearance of deliberation. (Applause.) I have never be¬ 
lieved entirely that there was very much thinking upon general 
public questions done in the City of New York; not because there 
are not some of the finest thinking machines in New York that 
are to be found anywhere, but because the brains of New York 
are so devoted throughout long days to special undertakings that there 
is only the evening, when fatigue has conquered you, in which to think 
about the affairs of the country. And, therefore, it seems to me 
that men of eminent success in the fields of business are, above 
all others, under a moral obligation to get together and talk of 
things which do not concern their own private undertakings. It 
is refreshing at this particular time to have an opportunity to 
discuss, not personalities, but the questions of the day. (Applause.) 
I was in a New England city, not many weeks ago, which had just 
been visited on the two preceding days by two militant candidates 
for nomination. I had occasion at the opening of my speech to 
say: “After what you people have been through the last two days, 
perhaps you would like to know what the questions of the day are.” 
I was interested to find that instead of a mere smile, I got out of 
that audience that had dropped in from the street, a spontaneous 
cheer. They felt refreshed at the idea that they might hear some¬ 
thing discussed which did not have the bitterness of personality in it. 

And yet, it is a serious fact, ladies and gentlemen, that it is 
very difficult to discuss those very questions of the day without 
seeming to bring a touch of passion and bitterness into them. We 
talk a great deal about the radicalism of our time, but the radicalism, 
if you will analyze it, does not consist in the things that are pro¬ 
posed but in the things that are disclosed. It is in the analysis of 
existing conditions that your public speakers seem to be radical. 
How shall our difficulties be settled after we have excited our minds 
by disclosing those conditions? We are so busy with the prelimi¬ 
nary controversy with regard to what the real state of the facts 
is that we carry that extreme over into the other area, which 
should be an area of calmness, of deliberation, namely the area of 
the discussion of what shall be done in the circumstances. 

Very little has been said about that but a great deal has been 
said, and sometimes intemperately said, about the real state of af¬ 
fairs. Nowhere, it seems to me, in the country more than in New 
York ought we to be very frank with one another; because in New 
York, taking you in the aggregate, you know what the facts are and 
if you are frank with one another and take the public into yo,ur 
confidence you may be instrumental in instructing the country con¬ 
cerning what it must found its thoughts upon. 

When you discuss the relation between government and busi¬ 
ness, you touch at once the seat of irritation. I have not found a 

3 


single audience in this vicinity in which the business men were not 
up in arms at being interfered with by the action of the govern¬ 
ment—in which there were not to be found a great many men 
who said “if the politicians would only let us alone the country would 
prosper and all business would settle down to a sound and steady 
condition.” They have been critics of government because government 
would not let business rest and be free. Now, no study of the 
history of the government can be candidly made which will not 
lead to this conclusion—that the very thing that government cannot 
let alone is business, for business underlies every part of our life; 
the foundation of our lives, of our spiritual lives included, is economic. 

I heard a very interesting preacher say several months ago, 
in preaching upon the sequence of the petitions in the Lord's Prayer, 
that it was significant that our Savior's first petition was “Give 
us this day our daily bread,” for no man can rationally live, worship, 
or love his neighbor on an empty stomach; and if he is in doubt 
where the food is to come from, if he fears he will be without work 
and sustenance, it is impossible that he should have a rational at¬ 
titude toward the life of the community or towards his own life. 
Therefore, it is the object of government to make those adjust¬ 
ments of life which will put every man in a position to, claim his 
normal rights as a living, human being. 

Government cannot take its hands off of business. Government 
must regulate business, because that is the foundation of every 
other relationship, particularly of the political relationship. It is 
futile, therefore, to have the politicians take their hands off. They 
may blunder at the business, but they cannot give it up. They 
may make fundamental mistakes—they will make a great many if 
you do not frankly assist and instruct them—but they must go 
forward whether instructed or not. 

I think one of the few grounds of discouragement in o ( ur days— 
for I do not think there are many—is that business men and the 
lawyers who guide business men are jealously withholding their 
counsel from those who try to guide affairs, withholding it as those 
who withdraw in suspicion, as if they should say, “We cannot parley 
with those men, their ears are not candidly open to us”; and so 
there has grown up on o,ne side and on the other an attitude of 
distrust which does not augur well for a settlement of delicate 
questions. 

The whole problem of our life, gentlemen, is to understand one 
another, the whole problem of politics is to get together. Politics 
is not a mechanical problem, politics is not a problem of setting 
interests off against each other upon such a plan as that one cannot 
harm the other. The problem of politics is co-operation. The 
organic co-operation of the parts is the only basis for just govern¬ 
ment; unless we come to an understanding there can be no govern¬ 
ment. No man can hold off from affairs and count himself a faith¬ 
ful citizen of the Republic. 

I have been interested in one piece of speculative explanation, 
which perhaps I might turn aside for a moment to call to your 
attention. 

One of the chief benefits I used to derive from being president 
of a university was that I had the pleasure of entertaining thought¬ 
ful men from all over the world. I cannot tell you how much dropped 
into my granary by their presence. I had been casting around in my 
thought for something by which to draw several parts of 
my political ideas together when it was my good fortune to entertain 
a very interesting Scotchman who had been devoting himself to 
the philosophical thought of the seventeenth century. His talk 
was so engaging that it was delightful to hear him speak of any¬ 
thing, and presently there came out of the unexpected region of 


his thought the thing I had been waiting for. He called my at¬ 
tention to the fact that in every generation all sorts of specula- 
tion and thmKing tend to fall under the formula of the dominant 
though c of the age that has proceeded that. For example, after 
the Newtonian Theory of the universe had been developed, almost 
all thinking tended to express itself upon the analogies of the New¬ 
tonian Theory, and since the Darwinian Theory has reigned amongst 
us everybody tries to express what he wishes to expound in the terms 
of development and accommodation to environment. Now, it came 
to me as this interesting man talked, that the Constitution of the 
United States had been made under the dominion of the Newtonian 
Theory. You have only to read the papers of the Federalist to 
see it written on every page. They speak of the “checks and 
balances” of the constitution and use to express their idea the 
simile of the organization of the universe, and particularly of the solar 
system—how by the attraction of gravitation the various parts are 
held in their orbits, and represent Congress, the Judiciary, and 
the President as a sort of imitation of the solar system. 

No government, of course, is a mechanism; no mechanical theory 
will fit any government in the world, because governments are made 
up of human beings, and all the calculations of mechanical theory 
are thrown out of adjustment by the intervention of the human 
will. Society is an organism and every government must develop 
according to its organic forces and instincts. I do not wish to 
make the analysis tedious; I will merely ask you, after you go 
home, to think over this proposition: that what we have been wit¬ 
nessing for the past hundred years is the transformation of a New¬ 
tonian constitution into a Darwinian constitution. (Applause.) The 
place where the strongest will is present will be the seat of 
sovereignty. If the strongest will is present in Congress, then Con¬ 
gress will dominate the government; if the strongest guiding will 
is in the Presidency, the President will dominate the government; 
if a leading and conceiving mind like Marshall’s presides over the 
Supreme Court of the United States, he will frame the govern¬ 
ment, as he dicL_ There are no checks and balances in the mechanical 
sense in the constitution; historical circumstances have determined 
the character of our government. While we were forming the gov¬ 
ernment—that is to say down to a hundred years ago, when the 
War of 1812 was being fought, while we were finding our place among 
the nations of the world, while our most critical relations were over 
foreign relations—the Presidency necessarily stood at the front of 
affairs. You will find all the early presidents directly forming the 
government. But after we got our standing among the peoples of the 
world—from the close of the War of 1812 down to the beginning 
of the Spanish-American War, with the exception of the interval 
of the Civil War—the Presidents count for very little. There was 
then a free, miscellaneous domestic development that was insus¬ 
ceptible of guidance; it was spontaneous; it sprang up unbidden in 
every part of the country; the place of common counsel was the 
Congress of the United States; and the Congress overshadowed the 
President. 

One of the things I have always felt that Webster and Clay 
did not see was that they would diminish their prestige and power 
if they left the Senate of the United States and entered the Presi¬ 
dency. Why the men who were leading the chamber that was domi¬ 
nating the nation should have wished to be in the chair which was 
overshadowed by that chamber I have never been able to understand. 

But then came the Spanish-American War. Since then 
America has stood up, looked about her, drawn the veil of preoccupa¬ 
tion from her eyes, and beheld herself a great power among the 
peoples of the world; and ever since that moment the President has, 


of necessity, become the guiding force in the affairs of the country. 
It was inevitable and it now will, no doubt, remain inevitable because 
we are now in the same case with all other government. We cannot 
shut our eyes to foreign questions—particularly now when we see 
some prospect of breaking our isolation by lowering the tariff wall 
between us and other nations; now that we see some possibility 
of flinging our own flag out upon the seas again (Applause) and taking 
possession of our rightful share of the trade of the world. 

We have found that the private debates of committees and the 
haphazard creations of legislation in bodies which no one leads, do 
not suffice to clear our affairs. We must have some central points 
of guidance. This is the adjustment to environment; this is the 
Darwinization of the government of the United States. There is no 
violence in the process; there is no violence to any principle of our 
constitution; because, as has been said so often, the beauty of that 
constitution is that it did not predict anything but left everything 
possible by the very simplicity and elasticity of its makeup. If the 
Constitution of the United States had gone into the detail that some of 
our State constitutions go into, we would have to change it every ten 
years, on the average, as we have changed them. 

Now, all of this that seems pertinent to the matter which I would 
now bring to your attention, is that there must be some guiding and 
adjusting force—some single organ of intelligent communication be¬ 
tween the whole nation and the government which determines the 
policy of that nation. And, inasmuch as that determination must 
turn upon economics, that is to say upon business questions, it is 
absolutely necessary that we should analyze our present situation 
with regard to nothing but the facts. 

Perhaps I may sum my idea up in this way: The question of 
statesmanship is a question of taking all the economic interests of 
every part of the country into the reckoning. Every time any 
change is to be made in economic policies it must be made by an 
all-around accommodation and adjustment. Is that possible? There 
is no man, there is no group of men, who comprehend the entire 
business interests of this country; it is inconceivable that there 
should be. At best we can make a very rough and ready approxi¬ 
mation of it; and in order that you may make even an approximation 
it is necessary that there should be a free play of opinion from 
every part of the country upon the sensitive centre at Washington. 
Just as soon as one part begins to press harder than another, then 
the prospect of justice is uncertain, the task of statesmanship is 
rendered just so much the more difficult. All the sensitive parts 
of the government ought to be open to all the active parts of it. 
So soon as a small group of the active parts organize for the pur¬ 
pose of seeing to it that the government hears and heeds only them, 
then the task becomes impossible. 

Let me illustrate it by the tariff, because every business question 
in this country, whether you think so or not, gentleman, comes 
back, no matter how much you put on the brakes, to the question of 
the tariff. 

I hear on every side that the tariff was the “dominant” issue. 
Why, you cannot escape from it no matter in which direction you go. 
The tariff is situated in relation to other questions like Boston Com¬ 
mon in the old arrangement of that interesting city. I remember 
seeing once, in “Life” a picture of a man standing at the door of one 
of the railway stations of Boston and inquiring of a Bostonian the 
way to the Common. “Take any of these streets,” was the reply, 
“either direction.” Now. as the Common was related to the former 
winding streets of Boston, so the tariff question is related to the 
economic questions of our day. Take any direction and you will 

6 


sooner or later get to the Common. In discussing the tariff you 
may start at the centre and can go in any direction you please. 


Let us illustrate by standing at the centre, the Common itself, 
ou know as far back as 1828, when they did not know anything 
about politics as compared with what we know now, a tariff bill 
was passed which was called the “Tariff of Abominations,” because 
it did not have any beginning or end or plan. It had no traceable 
pattern m it. It was as if the demands of everybody in the United 
otates had ail been thrown indiscriminately into one basket and 
that basket presented as a piece of legislation. It has been a general 
scramble and everybody who scrambled hard enough had been taken 
care of in the tariff schedules resulting. It was an abominable thing 
to the thoughtful men of that day, because no man guided it, shaped 
it, or tried to make an equitable system out of it. That was bad 
enough, but at least everybody had an open door through which 
to scramble for his advantage. It was a go-as-you-please, free-for- 
everybody struggle and anybody who could get to Washington and 
say he represented an important business interest could be heard 
by the Committee on Ways and Means. We have a very different 
state of affairs now. The Committee on Ways and Means and the 
Finance Committee of the Senate discriminate by long experience 
among the persons whose counsel they are to take in respect to 
tariff legislation, because there has been substituted for this un¬ 
schooled body of citizens that used to clamor at the doors of the 
Finance Committee and the Committee on Ways and Means, one of 
the most interesting and able bodies of expert lobbyists that has 
ever been developed in the experience of any country-men who 
know so much about the matters they are talking of that you 
cannot put your knowledge into competition with theirs. Because 
they overwhelm you with their knowledge of detail you cannot dis¬ 
cover wherein their scheme lies. They suggest the change of a 
fraction in a particular schedule and explain it to you so plausibly 
that you cannot see that it means millions of dollars additional for 
the consumer of this country. Again, they propose to put the carbon 
in our electric lights in two foot pieces instead of one foot pieces 
and you do not see where you are getting sold because you are not 
an expert and they are. They have calculated the whole thing be¬ 
forehand, they have analyzed the whole detail and consequences, each 
one in his specialty. As compared with him the average unschooled, in¬ 
experienced business man has no possibility of competition. Instead 
of the old scramble, which was bad enough, you got the present 
expert control of the tariff schedules. Thus the relation between 
business and government becomes not a matter of the exposure of 
all the sensitive parts of the government to all the active parts 
of the people, but the special impression upon them of a particular 
organized force in the business world, moreover so far as delibera¬ 
tion is concerned, its action, its motions, its actual purposes are 
secret. Why, it is notorious, for example, that many members of the 
Finance Committee of the Senate did not know the significance of 
the tariff schedules which were reported in the present tariff bill 
to the Senate, and members of the Senate who asked Mr. Aldrich 
direct questions for information were refused the information they 
sought, sometimes, I dare say, because he could not give it, and 
sometimes, I venture to say, because disclosure of the information 
would have embarrassed the passage of the measure. There were 
essential papers which could not be got at. Take that very in¬ 
teresting matter, that will-o-the-wisp, known as “the cost of pro¬ 
duction.” It is hard for any man who has ever studied Economics 
at all to restrain a cynical smile when he is told that an intelligent 
body of his fellow citizens are looking for “the cost of production” 
as a basis for tariff legislation. It is not the same in any one fac- 


tory lor two j r ears together. It is not the same in one industry from 
one season to another. It is not the same in one country at two 
different periods. It is constantly eluding your grasp. It does not 
exist as a scientific, demonstrable datum fact. But, in order to 
carry out the extraordinary programme proposed in the late national 
platform of the Republican party, it was necessary to go through 
the motions of finding out what it was. I am credibly informed 
that the government of the United States requested several foreign 
governments, among others the Government of Germany, to supply 
it with as reliable figures as possible concerning the cost of pro¬ 
ducing certain articles corresponding with those produced in the 
United States. The German Government, I understand, put the 
matter in the hands of certain of her manufacturers, who sent in 
just as complete answers as they could procure from their books. 
The information reached our government during the course of the 
debate on the Paine-Aldrich Bill and was transmitted—for the bill 
by that time had reached the Senate—to the Finance Committee of 
the Senate. But I am told—and I have no reason to doubt it— 
that it never came out of the pigeon-holes of the committee. I 
don't know and that committee doesn't know what the information 
it contained was. When Mr. Aldrich was asked about it he first 
said it was not an official report from the German Government. 
Afterwards he said it was an impudent attempt on the part of the 
German Government to interfere with tariff legislation in the United 
States! But he never said what the cost of production disclosed 
by it was. If he had it is more than likely that some of the tariff 
schedules would have been shown to be entirely unjustifiable. 

Such instances show you just where the centre of gravity is— 
and it is a matter of gravity indeed, for it is a very grave matter! 
It lay during the last Congress in the one person who was the ac¬ 
complished intermediary between the expert lobbyists and the legis¬ 
lation of Congress. I am not saying this in derogation of the character 
of Mr. Aldich. It is no concern of mine what kind of man Mr. 
Aldrich is. Now, particularly, that he has retired from public life 
it is a matter of indifference. The point is that he, because of his 
long experience, his long handling of these delicate and private 
matters, was the usual and natural instrument by which the Con¬ 
gress of the United States informed itself, not as to the wishes of the 
people of the United States or of the rank and file of business men 
of the country, but as to the needs and arguments of the experts 
who came to arrange matters with the committees. 

The moral of the whole matter is this: The business of the 
United States is not as a whole in contact with the Government 
of the United States. So soon as it is the matters which now give 
you, and justly give you, cause for uneasiness will disappear. Just 
so soon as the business of this country has general, free, welcome 
access to the councils of Congress all the friction between business 
and politics will disappear. 

There is another matter to which you must direct your at¬ 
tention, whether palatable or not. I do not talk about these things 
because they please my palate; I do not talk about them because I 
want to attack anybody or upset anyone; I talk about them because 
I wish to find out what the facts are, otherwise, I will move like a man 
groping in darkness. If what I say is not true then I am susceptible 
of correction. 

You will notice from a recent investigation that things like 
this take place: A certain bank invests in certain securities. It 
appears from the evidence that the handling of these securities was 
very intimately connected with the maintenance of the price of a 
particular commodity. Nobody ought, and in normal circumstances 
nobody would, for a moment think of suspecting the managers of a 

8 


great bank of making such an investment in order to help those who 
were conducting a particular business in the United States to maintain 
the price of their commodity; but the circumstances are not normal. 
It is beginning to be believed that in the big business of this country 
nothing is disconnected from anything else. I do not mean in this 
particular instance to which I have referred and have in mind to draw 
any inference at all, for that would be unjust; but take any in¬ 
vestment of an industrial character by a great bank. It is known 
that the directorate of that bank interlaces in personnel with ten, 
twenty, thirty, forty, sixty boards of directors of all sorts, of railroads 
which handle commodities, of great groups of manufacturers which 
manufacture commodities, and of great merchants that distribute 
commodities; and the reason that a bank is under suspicion with 
regard to its investments is that it is at least considered possible 
it is playing the game of somebody who has nothing to do with 
banking, but with whom some of its directors are connected and 
joined in interest. The ground of unrest and uneasiness, in short, 
on the part of the public at large is the growing knowledge that 
many large undertakings are interlaced with one another, indis¬ 
tinguishable from one another in personnel. 

Therefore, when a small group of men approach Congress in 
order to induce the committee concerned to concur in certain legis¬ 
lation, nobody knows the ramifications of the interests which those 
men represent, and therefore it is not the frank and open action of 
public opinion in public counsel, but every man is at any rate sus¬ 
pected of representing some other man and it is not known where 
the connection ceases. The whole question, therefore, with regard 
to the relation of government to business is this, gentlemen, not 
whether there should be a connection, not whether economic legisla¬ 
tion should be carefully, studiously, prudently considered, but 
through whom is the connection to be maintained? Are the contacts 
to be general or special? Are they to be in the nature of general 
public opinion or in the nature of private control? 

I am one of those who have been so fortunately circumstanced 
that I have had the opportunity to study the way in which these 
things come about and therefore I do not suspect any man has 
deliberately planned these things. I am not so uninstructed and misin¬ 
formed as to suppose that there is a malevolent combination some¬ 
where to dominate the government of the United States. I merely say 
that by certain processes, now well known, and perhaps natural in 
themselves, there has come about so extraordinary a concentration 
in the control of business in this country that the people are afraid 
that there will be a concentration in the control of government. 
That either is so or is not. If it is so, I beg you to observe that I 
am not a radical in frankly stating it. If it is not so, then I am 
desirous of your co-operation in order that I may be better informed; 
for I hold my mind open to every kind of information that I can 
get; and I have sense enough to know that no one man understands 
the United States. 

I have met some gentlemen who professed they did. I have 
even met some business men who professed they held in their own 
single comprehension the business of the United States; but I am 
educated enough to know that they do not. Education has this 
useful effect, that it narrows of necessity the circles of one’s egotism. 
No student knows his subject. The most he knows is where and 
how to find out the things he does not know with regard to it. That 
is also the position of a statesman. No statesman understands the 
whole country. He should make it his business to find out where 
he will get the information to understand at least a part of it at 
a time when dealing with complex affairs. What we need more 
than anything else, therefore, is experience meetings, like this— 

9 


a universal revival of common counsel. That's what investigations 
by Congress are for. I do not understand their primary object to 
be to get anybody in jail or, if it be to find out which men ought 
to be in jail and which ought not, it is with the confident expectation 
that it will be discovered that the vast majority ought not to be. 
But the majority are under suspicion until it is discovered who the 
minority are who ought to be in jail? No man could even get through 
a highly reputable company like this without investigation and put 
his finger on the innocent men. Not until everything about you is 
known is it possible to separate the sheep from the goats; but I 
have a confident expectation that the majority of the sheep would 
be enormous and it would not be necessary to shear them. 

You remember it was told of a certain United States Senator 
that he was so cautious in his statements that he was the despair 
of every newspaper reporter who sought to interview him. On one 
occasion he was on a train which was passing through a grazing 
country and saw a flock of sheep in the field. It was rather late 
in the season. One of his companions remarked, “That's very singu¬ 
lar, those sheep are not sheared yet." The Senator answered, “So 
it would appear, looking at them from this side." 

Now, the shearing time has not come in the great matter we 
speak of, and I do not think it will come; but the time has come 
to determine who are responsible for the things that ought not to 
be done, who are to be set free to do as they please, for that is the 
problem of honest business and right politics. The problem of 
politics is, who should be restrained and who should not; and the 
problem of business is, who should be restrained and who should 
not. The whole analysis of modern conditions is a discussion of 
control. Do not get impatient, therefore, gentlemen, with those who 
go about preaching “We must return to the rule of the people.” 
All they mean, if they mean anything rational, is that we must 
consent to let a majority into the game. We must not permit any 
system to go uncorrected which is based upon private understand¬ 
ings and expert testimony; we must not allow the few to determine 
what the policy of the country is to be. It is a question of access 
to our own government. There are very few men within the sound 
of my voice who have any real access to the government of the 
United States. It is a matter of common counsel; it is a matter 
of united counsel; it is a matter of mutual comprehension; it is a 
matter of mutual understanding. 

I wish these matters could be more discussed, but it is very 
difficult to discuss them nowadays; there is too much noise in the 
air. I feel nowadays, not in gatherings like this, but in gatherings 
of the ordinary sort, very much as I felt at a certain county fair. 
The grand-stand by the race-track was set back from the track, I 
suppose 50 feet, and a speakers' stand had been erected just in 
front of it, opposite the little pagoda where the judges of races 
stood; and I was put up to address the grand-stand. Just back of 
the grand-stand there was a most obstreperous hurdy gurdy ac¬ 
companying the giddy motions of a merry-go-round, and while I 
was trying with my voice to compete with that they started a 
horse race behind my back. Not having the attention of the grand¬ 
stand, I did what any normal man would have done: I stopped and 
watched the norse race. That is an allegory with regard to our 
present situation. It is very difficult to address the grand-stand, 
and I am glad I got you off in a corner. 

But what is at stake? That's what makes a man's thought 
infinitely sober, and sometimes touches' it with a certain degree of 
sadness. What is at stake in this business? Why, nothing less than 
the content, the hope, and the life of the people of thfs country. 

10 


Say what you please, the real basis of disturbance in the field of 
*™s just now is the suspicion of the great body of people in 
the United States concerning the methods and combinations of busi¬ 
ness; and business cannot breathe an atmosphere of suspicion and 
live. You must, at any risk, remove that suspicion, or else there can 
be no normal business in the United States. 

What is that suspicion based upon? It is not a contest between 
the men now in control of business and the men now in control of the 
government of the United States. It is a contest between those 
men and the normal life of the country; and there is everything 
involved. How would it suit the prosperity of the United States, 
how would it suit the success of business to have a people that went 
every day sadly or sullenly to their work. How would the future 
look to you if you felt that the aspiration has gone out of most 
men, the confidence of success, the hope that they might change 
their condition, if there was everywhere the feeling that there was 
somewhere covert dictation, private arrangement as to who should 
be in the inner circle of privilege and who should not, a more or less 
systematic and conscious attempt to dictate and dominate the economic 
life of the country? Do you not see that just so soon as the old 
self confidences of America, just so soon as her old boasted advantages 
of individual liberty and opportunity are taken away, all the energy 
of her people begins to subside, to slacken, to grow loose and pulpy, 
without fibre, and men simply cast around to see that the day does, 
not end disastrously with them. 

For eighteen months now I have been on the inside of some 
things and I owe it to a very elastic temperament that I have not 
become cynical. When I know that certain men actually do not 
possess political liberty because other men hold their notes, then 
I know that normal conditions do not exist, in the United States, and 
that I do know for I have had it from the mouths of the men who 
suffered thraldom.. When I know that men very prominent in busi¬ 
ness dare not tell me what they think of some of the circumstances 
of the organization of modern business except privately and under 
pledge of confidence, then I know that something sinister has hap¬ 
pened in America that has disturbed our intellectual manhood and 
our political liberty. I have made it my business to talk with men 
who understand the economic conditions of the country vastly better 
than I do, because they were concerned in large business trans¬ 
actions, and J have almost invariably found them disposed to ask 
me not to say where I got my information. 

In God/s name, gentlemen, where does that point! Is it possible 
that there is some financial tyranny obtaining in America! It is not 
necessary that the men who exercise it should entertain tyrannous 
purposes; they may be unconscious of it; they may feel the same 
impulse of patriotism that you and I feel. Is it possible that we 
have allowed the system to grow up which they use and that you 
and the other men are afraid of them? That’s what we have to 
face; and our stake is the reputation and happiness of a great nation. 
Alas, that we should have to ask the question! Alas, that men 
who ask it should be supposed to be desirous of upsetting the in¬ 
stitutions of the country! Some of the institutions of this country 
have been upset already not by political agitators but by those 
who have exercised an illegitimate control over the government, 
over the legislatures of the States of the Union. There, again, I 
am on ground absolutely firm under my feet; for it is the ground 
of knowledge. I can furnish you a list of the partners and I say 
that when that is true, if it can be true, then our duty is so plain, 
so luminous, so attractive, that I do not see how any man can 
turn away from it. It is nothing less than to rehabilitate our own 
self-respect and our own liberty; it is nothing less than the op- 

11 


portunity, the glorious opportunity, to recover the institutions of 
the United States, to set them up again in their purity and in¬ 
tegrity and see to it that no man dare breathe a single breath of 
suspicion against them; to see that they are not tarnished by the 
detiling touch of any man with unclean hands! 

We have come to an age when constructive statesmanship is 
imperative and I thank God for it. Who will be the volunteers ? Who 
will volunteer for immortality? Ah, how men deprive themselves of 
honor! How men live upon husks and throw away the thing that nour¬ 
ishes ! How men lose the happiness of life by not seeing wherein it con¬ 
sists! How men selfishly decline to serve, and so find out the 
infinite reward of unselfishness? How blind, how self-denying, how 
stupid we aref 

There are some words about which we are very careful. There 
is not much discriminating use of individual words in America, but 
there is one word about which we are very careful. We use the 
word “great” to describe anybody who has been talked about. It 
does not require character to be great; it only requires size of 
achievement. You may throttle everybody else and get everything 
they own and be “great.” You may be great and be feared; but 
there is one word which we bestow with great discrimination and 
that is the word “noble.” You cannot be noble without character, 
you cannot be noble and not be loved; you cannot be noble and not 
serve somebody ; you cannot be noble and spend every energy you 
have on yourself. 

Who are candidates for this open peerage of America? Who 
desires the patent of nobility amongst us? Only those who will 
enter upon this great enterprise of recovering the ancient purity and 
simplicity of our politics. We can do it by mere candor; we’can 
do it by merely discussing the facts and meeting them. We can 
do it without disturbing one of the legitimate transactions of 
business. 

I am always afraid that business men who are uneasy have 
something to be uneasy about; or that, if there is nothing in itself 
that justifies their uneasiness, perhaps they do not comprehend what 
their real situation is. You can find it out in this way. Take the 
experience in Wisconsin. The men who were in control of the public 
service corporations of Wisconsin fought the plans of that State for 
th§ regulation of such corporations as they would have fought the 
prospect of ruin; and what happened? Regulation of the most 
thorough-going sort was undertaken and the result was that the 
securities of those companies were virtually guaranteed to pur¬ 
chasers. Instead of being speculative in value, they were known 
to be absolutely secure investments, because a disinterested agency, 
a commission representing the community looked into the conditions 
of this business, guaranteed that there was not water enough in it 
to drown in, guaranteed that there was business enough and plant 
enough to justify the charges and to secure a return of legitimate 
profit; and every thoughtful man connected with such enterprises 
in Wisconsin now takes off his hat to the men who originated the, 
measures once so much decaded. The chief benefit, was, not regu¬ 
lation, but frank disclosure and the absolutely open and frank re¬ 
lationship between business and government. That’s tfte advantage 
The regulation may in some particulars have been unwise and hasty* 
but the relationship was absolutely normal and wholesome That 
is the way, no doubt, in which a satisfactory relationship i*s goinsr 
to be restored between the business of the country and the Govern 
ment of the United States—by frank disclosure and well-considered 
readjustment. 

Of course, there must.be first, a flood of released water. I have 
sometimes wondered whether that great, obstructing “standpat” dam 


was not erected to restrain the release of watered stock. You must let 
it out sooner or later; and the sooner the better, because if we 
do it soon we will do it in good temper and if late there is danger it 
may be done in ill-temper. 

What is the alternative, gentlemen? You have heard the rising 
tide of Socialism referred to here to-night. Socialism is not growing 
in influence in this country as a programme. It is merely that the 
ranks of protestants are being recruited. Socialism is not a pro¬ 
gramme but a protest against the present state of affairs in the 
United States. If it becomes a programme, then we shall have to 
be very careful how we purpose a competing programme. ,1 do not 
believe in the programme of Socialism. If any man can say he knows 
anything from the past perhaps he can say that the programme of 
Socialism would not work; but there is no use saying what won't 
work unless you can say what will work. 

A splendid sermon was once preached by Dr. Chalmers on “The 
Expulsive Power of a New Affection." If you want to oust Socialism, 
you have got to propose something better. It is a case, if you will 
allow me to fall into the language of the vulgar, of “put up or shut 
up." You cannot oppose hopeful programmes by negations. Every 
statesman who ever won anything great in any self-governing 
country was a man whose programme would stand criticism and 
had the energy behind it to move forward against opposition. It 
is by constructive purpose that you are going to govern and save 
the United States, and therefore a man ought to welcome the high 
privilege of addressing an audience like this. You can analyze, 
you can form purposes. Many of you do know what is going on. 
You know what part is wrong and what is right, if you have not 
lost your moral perspective, and you know how the wrong can 
be stopped. 

Very well, then, let us get together and form a constructive 
programme, and then let us be happy in the prospect that in some 
distant day men shall look back to our time and say that the chief 
glory of America was not that she was successfully set up in a 
simple age when mankind came to begin a new life in a new land, 
but that, after the age had ceased to be simple, when the forces of 
society had come into hot contact, when there was bred more heat 
than light, there were men of serene enough intelligence, of steady 
enough self-command, of indomitable enough power of will and 
purpose to stand up once again jnd say: “Fellow citizens, we have 
come into a great heritage of liberty; our heritage is not wealth; 
our distinction is not that we are rich in power; our boast is, rather, 
that we can transmute gold into the life blood of a free people." Then 
it will be recorded of us that we found out again what seemed the 
lost secret of mankind—how to translate power into freedom, how 
to make men glad that they were rich, how to take the envy out of 
men's hearts that others were rich and they for a little while poor, by 
opening the gates of opportunity to every man and letting a flood 
of gracious guiding light: illuminate the path of every man that is 
born into the world. 


13 


The World, Thursday, May 30, 1912. 


FOR PRESIDENT—-WOODROW WILSON. 


Woodrow Wilson, of New Jersey, should be the Democratic can¬ 
didate for President. 

That is the opinion of The World. That is the counsel of the 
New Jersey primaries. That is the logic of the situation. 

It is time for facts and not for theories. Judson Harmon might 
prove a strong candidate in New York and Ohio, but his nomination 
has been rendered impossible. Champ Clark would be a hopelessly 
beaten candidate in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. He 
could do no better than Mr. Bryan, who has lost these States three 
times and would lose them again if nominated. Oscar W. Under¬ 
wood is of Presidential size, but he has been untested as a candidate 
in the North and is an unknown quantity to most of the voters. 
Woodrow Wilson alone has a record of continuing victory in the sec¬ 
tion in which victory is essential to Democratic success. 

What other Democratic candidate could poll so many votes in 
the great debatable States of the East—New York, New Jersey and 
Connecticut ? 

What other Democratic candidate, who could carry these States, 
would be so strong in the great debatable States of the Middle West— 
Ohio and Indiana? 

What other Democratic candidate could make so powerful an 
appeal to hundreds of thousands of thoughtful independent voters 
without whose support no Democratic President can be elected? 

What other Democratic candidate could so well stem the rising 
tide of Rooseveltism, which now threatens to engulf representative 
government and Republican institutions? 

What other Democratic candidate would so fully measure up 
to the ideals of the sane radicals and the sane conservatives upon 
whose joint action the result of the election will hinge? 

The World hitherto has withheld its active support from all 
candidates. It advocated an open convention at Baltimore, and ad¬ 
vised its Democratic friends to await the action of the Republicans 
at Chicago. The open convention is assured. The measure of all 
the candidates has been taken. The situation is clarified and further 
delay is unnecessary. # 

Like a twentieth-century Genghis Khan, Theodore Roosevelt, 
with his horde of prairie Populists and Wall Street Socialists, is 
sweeping down upon the Republican National Convention. Mr. Taft 
seems as powerless to check him as the degenerate Romans were to 
check the descent of the Goths and the Vandals. The historic party 
of Lincoln and Seward and Chase and Sumner and Conkling and 
Chandler and Blaine and Garfield and Harrison and Sherman and 
McKinley is apparently in the death throes. This is the twilight 
of the gods, and the Democratic party must rise not only to its op¬ 
portunity but to its responsibility. 

How can it do its duty better than to match sanity against 
lunacy; statesmanship against demagogy; the historian against the 
Rough Rider; the educator of public opinion against the debaucher 
of public opinion; the first term against the third term; the tariff- 
reformer against the stand-patter; the man who would prosecute 
trust magnates against the man who protects trust magnates; the 
man with clean hands against the man who draws his campaign 
fund from Wall Street; the supporter of constitutional government 
against the champion of personal government; law against lawless¬ 
ness; Americanism against Mexicanism; the Republic against the 
dictatorship ? 


14 


Who better represents these issues than Woodrow Wilson? Who 
is better qualified than Woodrow Wilson to appeal to the intelligence 
and common sense of the American people against the most cunning 
and adroit demagogue that modern civilization has produced since 
Napoleon III? 

Who would stand a better chance of election in this great 
national crisis 7 

Let us look at the facts : 

It will require 266 electoral votes to elect a President. The 
so-called Southern States, including Maryland and Missouri, have 175 
votes. Assuming that Arizona will go Democratic too, practically 
any Democratic candidate for President can count on 178 electoral 
votes. But 88 more are necessary to victory. Where can these 88 
be found. 

It is folly to look for them west of the Mississippi River. The 
West is in the midst of another revival of Populism. In Theodore 
Roosevelt it has found a new substitute for its gospel of free silver. 
He is the political reincarnation of James B. Weaver, Mary E. Lease, 
•Jerry Simpson and Peffer. He is the heaven-born ratio of 16 to 1 
in a still more fascinating form. It is idle to think that any Demo¬ 
crat could appeal to the West against Roosevelt. It is idle to think 
that anybody who is not a far more masterful and dangerous dema¬ 
gogue than Roosevelt could command the support of the Populists 
who now call themselves Republican Progressives. 

The Democratic party, if it is to win the election and safe¬ 
guard Amreican institutions, must unite the East and the South 
as Tilden did in 1876. The candidate must carry New York with its 
45 electoral votes. He must carry New Jersey with its 14 electoral 
votes. He must carry Cincinnati with its 7 electoral votes. 
To lose these States is to give Roosevelt a walkover. To win 
these States is to win not only 66 of the 88 electoral votes that are 
needed, but in all probability it is to win Ohio with 24 votes; it is to 
win Indiana with 15 votes, which is the historical political ally of 
New York and New Jersey; it is to give the Democratic party an 
opportunity of victory in Massachusetts with its 18 votes, and to 
bring Delaware with its 3 votes back into the Democratic column. 
In other words, it is to elect a Democratic President of the United 
States. 

It is in the East that Democratic victory must be won. It is in 
the East that Rooseveltism must be overthrown!. It is the East that 
must save the country from a third term and all it implies. For that 
reason The World regards Woodrow Wilson as the strongest can¬ 
didate the Democratic party can nominate. 

The New Jersey primaries were a vital test of his political 
strength not only in New Jersey but in New York. They proved 
that local opposition to him is largely a myth. Although the cam¬ 
paign against him w T as well organized and abundantly financed, it 
failed miserably. He swept the State, and the only four delegates 
he lost were lost through the personal efforts of James Smith, Jr., 
a political boss whom Governor Wilson kept out of the United States 
Senate. In a section of the country where Wall Street and the 
political bosses are most powerful, Governor Wilson demonstrated 
that he has the confidence of the rank and file of the party, without 
which any man's candidacy is futile. He demonstrated as well that 
his political strength is the kind of strength that is essential to 
Democratic success in the vitally necessary States of New York, 
New Jersey and Connecticut. 

So much for that. 

During Governor Wilson’n public career The World has been 
compelled to take issue with him on many questions. We regarded 
with grave misgivings his sudden conversion to the initiative and 

15 


referendum, reversing the principles of a lifetime. We regretted his 
apparent disposition to imitate Mr. Bryan’s sweeping charges against 
the so-called Money Trust without supporting these charges with 
facts and specifications. We regretted his long campaign tours, his 
too eager chase after the nomination, and certain symptoms of in¬ 
stability which threatened to weaken his public usefulness. We have 
not hesitated to warn him when we thought he w T as going astray, 
and shall not hesitate to do so again in the future. 

But Governor Wilson’s elements of weakness are vastly over¬ 
balanced by bis elements of strength. He has proved his political 
courage and his fearlessness. He has proved himself sound on tariff 
reform. He has proved himself sound on the Sherman law. He 
has proved himself sound on corporation control. He has proved 
himself sound on trust prosecutions and personal guilt. He has 
proved himself sound against government by Wall Street plutocraey. 
He has proved himself sound on the independence of the judiciary. 
He has proved himself sound on the fundamental principles of con¬ 
stitutional government. He has proved that he is instinctively and 
temperamentally a Democrat. He has proved himself a free man 
who cannot be bulldozed by bosses or influenced against his con¬ 
victions even by his personal friends. That is the sort of man who 
ought to be President. 

Governor Wilson has had more public experience than Grover 
Cleveland had when he was elected President. He is better known 
to the rank and file of the party than Samuel J. Tilden was when 
he was nominated for President. The World believes that he would 
be a progressive constitutional President whom the American people 
could trust and for whom they would never have cause to apologize. 

We appeal to all Democrats to consider this matter soberly 
and thoughtfully and without prejudice. We appeal to the delegates 
to the Democratic National Convention to be swayed by no considera¬ 
tions except those of principle and the public welfare. We appeal 
to Mr. Bryan to throw his great political influence upon the side of 
Governor Wilson and aid the Democratic party to meet adequately * 
this great crisis in the Nation’s history. He has the most brilliant op¬ 
portunity for disinterested, patriotic leadership that has come to any 
American of this generation, and he has before him in Theodore 
Roosevelt a striking example of the meaning of ruthless and un¬ 
yielding ambition. 

It is not in behalf of Woodrow Wilson that The World urges 
his nomination. It is not merely in behalf of the Democratic party 
as a party. It is in behalf of the American people. It is in behalf 
of American institutions. It is in behalf of the Republic. It is in 
behalf of the Nation that is now confronted with the gravest menace 
that it has faced since the obliteration of human slavery and the 
overthrow of secession. 



16 











- % 
A ^ O -4. oV' 

* '<£, J,^ v’ 1 ' * * ,, ? A .'O^ , c °JL c *, 

^ '7 1 / ^ s ghiw///' 'r* ^ 


•*• A 

. cv’ 


,, */ v o*-rv , ’~°\> 

** ."vwtow'. v 

^ a 


>**' o 



S' </> 7 

</> o 

*>^ <-> 

C*" * 

i ft ^7^ y o * X ~ «A^ v . 

1 % O. / c° NG 


oV ^ % 

* -G X X/ 



☆ A 



»• # ! V^?f;r'\o° 

* v \\yx 

^ 7 0 * V 


f \ y 


* V I B 






-=* c 
^ <$> A<, 

<<? ^ * 

* .G V ^ * 


° ff 

<t 

■ k °’ < ••, v•^*>°% • • ->%?-*/: -♦, v ,o 


,o >/:*','% ■**’ / v-"* 

-. >■ w ^ fc « 



,o 




1 


■> ^\ x 



^ O. ”* ^ H 0 

S. s s»*r *t* 3 N ° 



* x*^ ^ V 

r ^ e& * 

l \ ^ “ 

J, n’t'" «’ ^ °' i .' V #% V 'i'“ A- 5 

s >'V‘j^:v 0 * k vv •-.%y * *' w ■ • * a.'~a*° — 




M 5 * *0 o x 


a ■* - ^ 

J V*\ ^ + 

V *r *• 



„*-. ,.., V'* .t. ’" /’■ \. ‘ v ’* /■ 

>0 ALp*J* <A v N , "», > ^ s' '’>* o V »'*•, 

z 










S S N A O 






^ J *’ , ^ V A oV 

y o 0 y * ,G <V , ~ . s ' A O y„ . * ,(j' «■" -V '^ Jr " < ' A 

' * * ^o c 0 N C ♦ '■%, * * A S * v 1 8 * ’ . 0 ^ c 0 N c * '%, ' ft * S A\ x ^ 1 8 4 

„ , 0 ^ 4 **dB$C* ° . 0 ' ■ 

- "o o' 

» <■ 

° vV '<** 



H. 

o 


H "71/ > X'^A' 


/ p ^'* 

N ° °* v^\ - ., V ‘ •'' ” /;s s « * ■' v<*\ > .., 

A v ."jjSito« % ^ *- •> * *&$» r 

»" , ?^* , 'V «■ 

r** « Cl ^ \L> ✓ 

^ y «* ,v* A<y 
4 *h 
1 O 

+ A ^ K 

- <> bo' i .° 




^ j S s y\ 

J r - > y * * s .\ 

>9 <P ^ 

■><> < iS ^ 




9 1 A 

v0' s 

a? * 

° 

' : ■*' \'M 



Cu y 

* o ° * 0 N o ■ 

' ' f t t . » 
* </> aV 

^ ^ ,< V 


V’%. 





o°‘ '"'•/ ^'" 

V r-STN.\AV^ y, • V) 

vT 

>T \° c ^- ^ © a ^ 

v ‘•»tA*' <.o° c a y * ,tT’° ,# v % . 

\o v s' s ;i^ ^ V s »’*•/ *'' < 



o 

« A* “A. „ 

c/.!‘ !r ♦/v <7;, >'\-^ ♦ ;v ° * 1 * * s > A v- * 

« r *}. 

* v 0 o 

7 >y A yC^ J' 

•**+ 4* '~~-r' .• . i\)J} V _ ,/» '^Sjkl\Y ‘X" > vV” ^ '~~f T J J \ y 

^ <- ' "‘ ■ \* r»0 As ^ ' v ^° o ,\t‘ c^. ^ ,. y> ^ \ r\0 CL v 

V ^ 


^ - ■ '* o^ 0 .'•; 3 " 0 ' v' NV . 1 * 0, 







0>^* s'* T ^ 0 N ° 

X V V ^ , aA-v V O 

-v ao _ ' JStmikL. + *f> 

«>L ♦ ^ w; ^ 


V? v^> * 

>* „ V • ^ 

’S A M r •* 1> <r . 

,0 V c 0 c ♦ . v * 

<N cS5v\Wh'4. + '^. a\ * 




\ %<$ 




O 0 

,-i *tu * ^ 


> ^ ^ + 

* C^v 

^ »«, - * 


,Vs,.' $ , .. 

' // cv V ^ ^ 

^ a, .Wa- 


* #--.W/ /% 

s A i •'«.»■* .(? 

- V “% °0 


r> 



































f.o- ->j v 



s\ > 


^ o 

*b * 




Y',--.^-S"‘y---- 





s" ’ '«.% ’ ’ N ° ■'•' 
< 


fj> O 



c </''' 

% ^ 

l„ , ; , n ... , v* . 

o5 ^ *- 2 \ 0 °>o 

mvj 5 **> j\' ^C-*- & ' 7' . ■,/ v _ y 

>* ^ - - - *v.;■;.*'"/ %'*rr .* 

0 V s S C‘ 

o 4‘ ,V, * jJ\ . ••• ’a. •Sk <-4 **■ ^4 a i< 

<\r s$y . §wwh °. ”%• 

■ ^ <? ” . 4- * 0 #|\ v ^ ■%. 

* £> < ' y * * \ s <A y>, J o * k * <G 

0 ^ <' , '°*,% ,/ v- ,i ' , , \ o^ 0 *'* 

* -<' "k ^ ^ A ^ . K - ' < 

m , sfla «• •*- v -$m»: w :*, 

Oo .‘WBoa. * . -**& 

A ^ ./> 

_j— ^ *' 0 ' * 

> • 0 * 1 ' , s * * T . **r ~ ^ ~ . V y a 0 * - > 

* *P. r c> * a ”6 








? ’ °° v 4 " :* ^ 

4 ^ *• * vOo. * 

*- -s p.0 

^ w \0 M 
«l» ’/* J N 

C 






* c 1 =) ^ “ 

** ^ ‘ 
y 0»x'*‘ ^G 

°o c. 0 ' ^ % 



^ c 
O -2b 


4 




v 

O 0 X 






-Vj «. /l- ('’■ ‘S>. (A ♦ .r^-.y w .i% <, <?' ^ 

° « 

A> </> 

A' <p 
*> ,kX 



** , , s <\ 

- * * cG « v 1 8 * 

■V s V 

' ,r ' j ' 

; ; 

; xo ©e, t 

# ^ ^0° C 0 ' » 0 N o° 

^ ^ s » v J rs* 

I ‘ ' ' 



% % f .C*,^ 

■'o o' ° « 

°* ^ ^ '/vw; 

'•v\- 



& 


. 4 . 


X 00 ^. 


, '-.-•* / 0N0 

* v * „ o_ -O' c 0 c >? 

/ \\ V £ —■ *> . 4*, 

^/ ^ -^- \ Ay/ •>* y 

^ V t. &MF&CZ/& *< o o x 0 

.^' - s i^-4^. ' ^ , T & & « r . t 

^ c! 

’,p ,^ v 0 C> 


°o -> 





* * 
(P l\\ «5 



4P V 


, * cS ^ 

^ •£> ■ <<> 

4 0 * y * ^ ‘ 0 N c ^ ^ 'T1 s s A , 

w^h ' y * 




s 0 <■ r 'l' 0 ^ v 

V S r A, o 


: 


* 0° / 


■ *^* r\ /’*-'» y K\ :^ ^ o ' r£* 1 t'tA A C\. y v ‘ ^ • 

'*V° —-%^ s0> v' % \ —, V*"'* 0^^ 1 . *%*“• ' 

s*pb\ \ ^ ' *Wa\ ■%.. 






* V 5 '<?’ » ^^fQJr * ’.' ■■>*, ^ v ce”^ 

^ a* y T> -a ,V A ^ ^ ^ 

»*<-' 1 A° ««,,%**»••>' 4 .v, %'“•* 

<0 A^ sN 4 * ' - <- 

v^z ^ Wu/yy'^*. '>* Y & 

“ oo x 


^ 4> ^ % 

^ ^G V < ''^ 

c 0 »■ c 

C * nr a" * 

\ y $ : 

* S, 0 °X. ”, 



/ W 1\', 


/ ^Vi * < \ 

<T* y 


% *0 

N 0 

>v c\^ 

^ * '</*. 



)5 •’i 





^ *..'* ,*p .... . 

. > Av' — ^ C ',. 

^ * 























































